Re: Regarding BITs vs. INTs

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Bill Moran wrote:

> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Bill Moran wrote:
> >
> >>I hadn't really looked at this until I started having problems with it.
> >>
> >>For those who haven't been following along, I'm converting an application
> >>originally written in MSSQL to Postgres.
> >>
> >>I'm a little startled by how BIT fields are handled differently.  Apparently,
> >>MSSQL converts freely between BIT and INT.  Those who know, already know that
> >>Postgres doesn't do this.
> >
> > No, but IIRC, it does allow casts between them, it just requires that you
> > explicitly mark that you want to cast the value.  If you really want to,
> > you could consider changing those casts into implicit casts and see if
> > that does what you want.
>
> True, and originally that's what I was doing to fix it.  For example:

No, I meant change the rows in pg_cast for the casts to mark the cast as
implicit rather than explicit (castcontext='i' rather than
castcontext='e').  Then the cast should happen automatically when
appropriate rather than requiring an explicit cast.